Should pot be legal?

[porphyrian]

That's marijuana, for the extremely out of touch. Well, should we legalize it?

[AJ9000]

1. Legalize all drugs. What you do to your body is not the governments business.

[porphyrian]

3. I'm not entirely opposed to that idea.

I agree that it isn't the government's business. I think it may be difficult to institute (drug dealers would likely be among our greatest opponents, ironically). I'm also inclined to believe that we don't operate in a vacuum and that even seemingly-victimless crimes can have unforeseen consequences on others that would need to be addressed. It would take the majority of the violence out of the drug business, however, which alone might warrant legalization.

[Bobbieo]

7. Do you really want to legalize 'meth'?

[Hippo_Tron]

9. Producing meth is dangerous to those around you

But I'm also not a big fan of DEA raids, either. Tough call here.

[porphyrian]

26. If meth were legal, people wouldn't have to make their own.

It could be produced in a controlled laboratory environment.

[liberalmike27]

45. Drug War, or War on Drugs

Like anything we put the words "war on" before, it has failed.

Of course pot should be legal, as it is no worse than alcohol, actually it is a lot less harmful. I wouldn't encourage anyone to smoke pot, or drink alcohol, or do anything like that for that matter, as it is harmful and there are a lot better ways to enjoy yourself, while making progress in your life.

We need to legalize pot, and decriminalize other drugs to some extent. Much of the violence that surrounds drugs has to do with the massive illegality of it, and the sentences of blacks who do crack being so much more severe than those of white granular snorting of cocaine. Crack has far less cocaine in it, costs less, and yet the sentences are fabulously more, which is clearly racist, somewhat subtly I suppose.

Drugs should be handled as a medical problem, and decriminalizing them will allow people with severe problems to get help, without fear of prosecution. Fear of being arrested keeps a lot of folks from gaining help that need it. I might add that approaching it from a medical standpoint also would hire a lot of folks like psychologists and health care workers, while freeing up the police for pursuing more violent offenders, as well as keeping prison cells free for those who do serious property crimes, rape, murder, and pillage.

[porphyrian]

12. If it was legal, people wouldn't be cooking it up in trailers where their family sleeps.

Meth has gotten a lot of press lately because it has grown in popularity with non-poor white kids, but there's much worse shit out there. It's the white peoples' crack epidemic, or so the media would have you believe. The truth is that meth has been around for a long time. Housewives in the Fifties and Sixties did it to lose weight (and it helped them clean the house for twelve hours at a time). Bikers and truck drivers have been on the stuff forever.

What we should really be worried about is all the medication that pharmaceutical companies buy a fast-track through FDA approval on which then ends up killing or horribly maiming so many that they're forced into recall, a situation that has happened with alarming frequency of late. Who goes to prison for permanently damaging the heart valves of thousands of patients, or giving them strokes, or their children autism?

[Bobbieo]

16. Wish you could have walked in my shoes for the past three years!!!!

[porphyrian]

21. Am I supposed to guess why, or do you care to elaborate? - n/t

[Bobbieo]

33. They don't call it the 'devil's drug' for nothin'

That should give you an idea!!!

[porphyrian]

35. You did meth with the devil?

At certain concerts, you'd be a god.

Seriously, though, I could guess all day what the fuck you're not talking about, and none of it would change what I said before you got all cryptic about it.

[KG]

48. ooops

[liberalmike27]

47. Good luck with that Bobbio

I know you can do it.

I wonder why there is an absolute dearth of anti-meth commercials on television?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

68. you can do it.

I quit 6 years ago.

I'm proud of myself, and you should be too. Ain't it a great feeling? :)

[maveric]

147. It truly takes away your soul.

I used to tweek and have been around tweekers and meth for nearly 35 years.
It IS the worst shit out there.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. From a purely philosophical standpoint, I agree that a consenting adult

should have the right to do whatever the sam hell he or she wants to do with his or her own body. (Insofar as he or she is not directly endangering anyone else, interfering with their life or liberty, driving, neglecting their kids, etc. etc.) Period. End of story.

However, the realist, practical side of me (as opposed to the hardcore social libertarian side) recognizes that, yes, meth is really bad shit- so what to do? I think the most sensible approach is to fully legalize (like alcohol or nicotine- for 18 or 21 & over, etc.) marijuana and perhaps certain psychedelics, and adopt a "harm reduction" strategy like the Netherlands has for certain "hard" drugs, like meth. Fund fact-based education (because in my experience, the best advertisement against meth is meth users themselves) and treatment on demand, but above all treat the whole mo'fo -at least when it comes to users- as a health issue, not a law enforcement one.

Beyond that, what about meth labs? That's a tough call, too. Since, among other things, they're obviously environmentally and physically dangerous to the area and people around them... One thing I'd say is, we spend something like $40 Billion a year on the drug war- and the drug war is PRIMARILY aimed at pot smoking. If we stopped fighting that useless battle, we might have the resources to come up with sane approaches to some of these other issues.

[porphyrian]

38. Fact-based education, indeed.

If anything serves as a gateway to drug use, it is finding out how you've been lied to about drugs, not any drug in particular. That's why I cringe every time I hear people blaming pot as a "gateway drug." Pot isn't the gateway, losing the trust and respect of the people the propaganda lies to is. "I didn't become a bald axe-wielding maniac by smoking pot, so maybe they lied about acid, too." Stupid prohibitionists.

[Fleshdancer]

91. Dentists would certainly profit

:scared:

[AJ9000]

132. Prohibiton of drugs hasn't worked any better than prohibition of alcohol did. If we

got out of the "drug enforcement business" black market prices would plumet, and criminal gangs would be all but destroyed. Combine this with meaningful job creation in low-income areas, and crime would plumet as well.

Or we could de-criminalize and tax/regulate drugs, pouring monies back into treatment centers for those who want out.

These approaches would be far superior to the outlaw and punish madness we've been doing the last 25 years.

Many countries (Holland for ex.) have already followed plans like these with much success.

[porphyrian]

148. It's funny how long we can deny facts in our faces. - n/t

[Greyhound]

133. Seems to me, if all drugs were legal, there wouldn't be much demand for meth. n/t

[anarch]

159. well, I dunno

legal and reasonably priced, maybe.

[Greyhound]

179. Legalization will naturally cause the price to collapse, and who is going to

smoke some mystery crap, made in a trailer, that smells like cat piss, when you can have pharmaceutical quality.

We will probably see a short-term spike in use, but history indicates that regular use will be the 2% - 8% range of the population and most of them, if given the help they need, will find that drug addiction is, in the end, unsatisfying.

[terrya]

27. Exactly right.

We have too many fucking wars as it is. The "war on drugs" is even more stupid than our war in Iraq.

Legalize everything. If you want to shoot up heroin, the government shouldn't keep you from doing it.

[bling bling]

84. I think the government should do everything they can about that.

Some drugs are a threat to our society. Heroin destroys people, destoys their families. Many, many people who become addicted don't recover, at least not without other drugs like methadone. I've seen it firsthand.

Have you ever seen babies shaking from withdrawal when they were born because they're addicted to crack. What about the infants and kids who aren't being supervised because their parents are too high or passed out. How can any responsible government not have any say in matters that dangerously impact the health and safety of innocent members of the society?

I think it would be negligent for the government to shut their eyes to people who want to use dangerous drugs like heroin and crack.

Marijuana is a different story altogether. I don't know why it's even in the same class as some of those other drugs. It simply isn't a black and white issue. Legalizing marijuana doesn't mean we should legalize 'em all. And just because the dangerous drugs are against the law doesn't mean they all should be.

[AJ9000]

136. I rest my case.

"Heroin destroys people, destoys their families. Many, many people who become addicted don't recover, at least not without other drugs like methadone. I've seen it firsthand."

"Have you ever seen babies shaking from withdrawal when they were born because they're addicted to crack. What about the infants and kids who aren't being supervised because their parents are too high or passed out."

All this in the USA where drugs are illegal.

[bling bling]

141. Making it more accessible will make the problem worse.

Like many people, I experimented with some drugs as a teenager. The drugs we tried were not of the addictive variety, such as marijuana and mushrooms. I enjoyed it. We had a good time with it.

And I can guarantee you one thing. The ONLY reason that I didn't try heroin or meth back then was because I didn't have access to it. Otherwise, I would have tried it in a heartbeat. I was curious and immature and unable to comprehend the life-long impacting consequences of some drugs.

Now I have a family member who also experimented with drugs as a teenager. But unlike me, she and her friends somehow found access to heroin. I'm not going to go into details but suffice it to say she has effectively gone from a beautiful and enjoyable person to a junkie who cares more about getting her fix than anything else in the world and she can't help it. It owns her. Heartbreaking doesn't even begin to describe the situation.

I thank god on a regular basis that my friends and I didn't have any connections to that type of drug when we were her age. The *access* to that drug is the only difference between me having the blissfully-ignorant-to-drug-addiction life I have now or having the tortured life of my addicted family member.

I will never believe that legalizing that venomous poison is in anyone's best interest. It will only enable people (and consequently young people) to have greater access to it than they already do.

Have mercy.

[Zhade]

181. Check out some studies on how Holland does it.

Their history concerning how they currently deal with drug usage in their country gives lie to your unfounded assumption (you can't see the future) that use would go up.

[bling bling]

188. If you can find a way to keep it out of the hands of teens, go for it.

I would need to hear a more detailed argument in order to believe that legalizing hard drugs would work better than keeping them illegal.

You didn't provide any links for Holland's system and without spending the rest of my evening on it what I could find was that they decriminalized soft drugs. From what I could see it's not technically legal to even possess marijuana there.

Holland is a smaller country than the United States. I believe the web site I was reading had the population at 15 million. The U.S. has 300 million people and 50 states so it seems fair to say that whatever program works for Holland may not work as easily for the United States.

I don't have a personal vendetta to keep drugs illegal. My only concern is doing whatever works best to keep young people from trying and getting addicted to hard drugs.

[porphyrian]

191. Laws don't stop teens from trying and getting addicted to hard drugs.

Laws also do not prevent teen access to many of those drugs. All the laws do is allow us to punish people after the fact, and then it's too late. The idea that laws are preventative is a myth. Look at the death penalty if you doubt this.

I'm too lazy to look up stats on Holland's treatment of drugs right now, but I did find information on marijuana from Australia further down this thread that you might find interesting.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

64. I agree. Also, all the money that's spent on law inforcement, incarceration etc

can be put into drug education. I guestimate that 75% of the prisons will empty (oops, there goes down another huge business).

[porphyrian]

66. You've nailed one of the biggest hurdles to legalization.

Too many people profit from the "drug war," specifically within the prison industry. Mandatory minimum sentences are unconstitutional. The legislative branch has no place doing the judicial branch's job. Yet they exist largely unchallenged because of this prison industrial complex. It's time we fixed this bullshit.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

65. I agree. Also, all the money that's spent on law inforcement, incarceration etc

can be put into drug education. I guestimate that 75% of the prisons will empty (oops, there goes down another huge business).

[sweetheart]

71. that is an unenumerated right from the 9th amendment

It was commonly accepted at the drafting of the bill of rights, that people
were free to take whatever medicinal plants they saw fit however they saw fit.

[porphyrian]

113. Wouldn't it be crazy if the "drug war" ended because it was unconstitutional? - n/t

[sweetheart]

118. MPP needs to borrow howard dean's 50 state strategy

The drugs war is a deeply unpopular cause, and if an optimistic
political challenge were made relentlessly at this point, the whole
thing would come down very quick. I am certainly no criminal
for smoking herb, between me and god, and that's the only relationship
i'm concerned with when it comes to personal choice.

The sacredness of choice and the first amendment is the true area
where i believe the drugs war is violating. The human choice is
sovereign, something above government, for which government merely
exists as a background.

[jayctravis]

140. Legalize anything utilized in its natural form.

Take the extra crap out of tobacco too.

If it grows and isn't a poison, it should be legal as put on earth by the deity of your choosing or absence thereof.

Coca leaves, as chewed by South Americans, yes. Refined cocaine, no.

If it requires a lab to create, it should be regulated as a medicine or be illegal.

[porphyrian]

149. Well, technically, anything that gets you high is a toxin.

Even the buzz you get from hyperventilating is mild oxygen poisoning. But who should be able to tell you what poison you can or cannot put into your body? The government? Organized religions?

[arcos]

2. It's a freaking plant...

It should be 100% legal like basil and oregano.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Who are we to question God's wisdom?

He must have put it here for a purpose.

:-)

[porphyrian]

14. Good a reason as any. - n/t

[porphyrian]

8. If we're going to ban a plant, it should be kudzu.

I know Jimmy Carter meant well, but the shit is just out of hand.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Carter isn't responsible for the current war on drugs

You can thank Nancy Reagan for it.

[porphyrian]

13. Oh, I know that. I'm talking about kudzu.

That ugly vine growing rampant all over the Southeast. Carter imported it from India for some reason - preventing erosion? I don't remember. Anyway, as happens with introduced exotics some times, it flourished beyond anyones' expectations, and now we can't kill it fast enough.

[Dorian Gray]

44. I thought it was from Japan...

When I went to Mississippi ten years ago, it was all over the place, and it's strangling much of the other plant life down there.

[porphyrian]

46. Well, it's definitely from Asia.

It seems to me I recall having a discussion where the variety we imported was identified as Indian, but you could be right.

[achtung_circus]

69. Wiki.

Kudzu was introduced from Japan into the United States in 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, where it was promoted as a forage crop and an ornamental plant. From 1935 to the early 1950s the Soil Conservation Service encouraged farmers in the South to plant kudzu to reduce soil erosion, and Franklin D. Roosevelt's Civilian Conservation Corps planted it widely for many years. Kudzu was recognized as a pest weed by the United States Department of Agriculture in 1953, and was removed from its list of permissible cover plants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kudzu

[porphyrian]

72. I know I wasn't high when I learned it...

I'm sure it was either in high school or junior college that I learned something about Carter introducing kudzu, I thought from India, to parts of Georgia. I mean, that was years ago, so maybe I'm suffering from brain damage after all. My apologies to any who are damaged or inconvenienced by my failing memory, it's warranty expired long ago.

[DemBones DemBones]

268. I don't have a lot of faith in wikipedia but I know kudzu was

imported from Japan long ago as a cover plant and was widespread in Georgia long before Carter was governor, so the rest of what wiki says on the topic may be accurate, too. Nobody know you couldn't kill the damned stuff. I've always wondered how the Japanese control it, if they do.

[Dorian Gray]

90. Heck,

I have no idea. I'm in the same boat. Someone told me it was from Japan, and that's the assumption I've been under! It's got a chokehold in the south, though! :)

[liberalmike27]

54. Remember "Soft on Crime?"

It's Reagan's doing. Carter was beginning to realize that the sentences were worse than the crimes, and saying that the sentences should not be worse than the crimes themselves. Reagan just used the "soft on crime" and every republican in sight repeated it several thousand times.

Democrats, being the pussies they have been in the past 30 years or so, instead of fighting back and saying I'm not soft on crime, I just have a major problem with criminalizing things terribly that are much less serious than property crimes.

We let burglars and car thieves out of jail in a year or two, and often keep drug offenders in for five years mandatory. Would you rather have your car stolen, or someone selling a bag across town. As a person who's gone to the parking lot to an empty space, you don't have to guess what my answer is. It is a bad feeling when your ride takes a hike.

The drug war has done massive damage to our society, and is an example of government run amuck, with one-sided partisan decisions. The two-party system is partly at fault too.

[porphyrian]

57. Yep, that's where all the mandatory minimum sentence bullshit came from.

The Carter reference was just in regards to kudzu.

[man4allcats]

4. Yes, like Cheetos

and Cheeto stains (If you know what that means, you're as old as I am, and you've smoked a lot of pot.) :hippie:

[porphyrian]

15. Luckily, I've never accidentally smoked a Cheeto.

It may seem a silly idea to some, but then they don't know how absolutely out of my mind I've been before.

[man4allcats]

31. I would suggest crushing up a few

and rolling them into a joint. I'm not sure what effect that might have, but I'd be inclined to try it. Whether it would contribute to the rather intense and certainly characteristic yellow stain on one's thumb and index finger from smoking reefers rolled in yellow ZigZag papers is an open question. I'm more inclined to think it might create an intense munchie craving for

CHEETO'S!

:hippie:

[porphyrian]

32. If I'm ever wasted enough to try it, I'll let you know how it went. - n/t

[kath]

6. Seems like it would be hard to regulate like tobacco, since it's so easy

to grow your own supply. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me it would be hard to grow and process you own tobacco, no?

[porphyrian]

17. Yeah, moreso than pot.

There's a guy who wrote a book (and he was on NPR talking about it a couple of years back) about how humans have drastically altered the evolution of certain plants for their own purposes. He listed a number of examples, one being potatoes, another being marijuana. It sounded like a very good book, so you should all read it if you can figure out what it's called and who wrote it.

[meganmonkey]

70. Botany of Desire by Michael Pollan

Excellent book :)

Tulips and apples were the other two main topics, aside from cannabis and potatoes.

[porphyrian]

157. That's it! Thanks. - n/t

[The Anti-Neo Con]

11. Yes, but regulate it.

Legalize it, but tax it. Limit it to only adults 21 & up like alcohol.

[porphyrian]

19. Above your post, kath brought up how easy it is to grow your own.

Because of this, it would be difficult to regulate. We could punish offenders after the fact and regulate sales, but homegrown would be available to anyone with a little patience and effort. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just wondering how we could regulate it.

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Regulate it if it's commercially available. It's also legal to brew your own beer.

But you can't home brew more than, like, a case a week or something.

I suspect you could have a similar situation for pot- legal to grow your own, but only a certain amount w/o triggering some kind of regulatory or licensing situation.

[porphyrian]

28. I'd be down with that. Personal consumption and all. - n/t

[FatDave]

20. legalize but regulate

But I think decriminalization would be a good start. For fuck's sake, we should get it off Schedule I. Even cocaine, meth and morphine are Schedule II substances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_rescheduling_in_the_United_States

[porphyrian]

24. Agreed. I'm still wondering how to regulate, though, as mentioned above.

Kath pointed out how easy it is to grow your own, and that's a good point. It's not like tobacco in that respect.

[FatDave]

119. Actually, I don't think it's all that easy to grow either

Yes, you can grow your own marijuana, but to get any of a decent quality will take a pretty good investment in grow lights and hydroponic setups. If it was legal to go down to the corner store and buy a pack of joints, I don't think too many people would bother unless they're also interested in it as a hobby.

Here's a similar situation. I make my own cigarettes. I buy tobacco online from a small farmer in VA and inject it into hollow paper tubes (complete with filters) on a $50 injector. I can make 20 cigarettes in about 5 minutes this way, and not only does it cost me about a third what a pack of Camels would, it's also a much higher-quality, more flavorful tobacco (without the added formaldehyde and manipulated nicotine levels). Now, if I can make a higher-quality cigarette with any exotic tobacco of my choosing for cheaper than buying name brands, why doesn't everybody do this? Because it's more convenient to just buy them.

[porphyrian]

214. Excellent point. Thanks for that. - n/t

[Berserker]

22. Yes legalize it

What the hell is the problem. I figured by now that it would have happened.

In the 37 years I have smoked it I have only smoked it a few times and then only when I wanted to.

[porphyrian]

29. I'm a little surprised myself. I guess the uber-conservatives fucked things up for everybody.

Go figure.

[Greyhound]

253. It was so that the DuPont, Rockefeller, Hearst, Anslinger, Mellon,

and the rest of the oil, timber, pharmaceutical, and chemical families never have to work for a living. We are deprived of the most useful, beneficial, and ecological product simply so that these criminal empires could be protected and vastly expanded, at taxpayer expense.

[porphyrian]

254. I wonder how environmentally positive it would be...

...to reinstitute the use of hemp instead of petroleum-based synthetics. Wouldn't that make a big dent in greenhouse gas emissions?

[Greyhound]

255. It wold be a boon to our economy, our environment, and our health

Anything that is made with petroleum can be made, far less expensively, with hemp oil. Hemp fibers are far superior to their petroleum counterparts. 100% of the hemp plant is useful, no manufacturing waste to dispose of, and the by-products are much less toxic.

Henry Ford built a car in 1941 that was almost entirely made with hemp plastic and was fueled by a hemp diesel engine. It was in Popular Mechanics.

[porphyrian]

256. Combined with algae farms for biodiesel...

...we could could make rapid progress in short order.

[Greyhound]

258. Hemp diesel fuel makes that unnecessary as well.

It really is a miraculous plant and they know it, that's why they keep it from us.

[porphyrian]

259. Algae has more biomass is all, and it would scrub more co2 faster. - n/t

[Greyhound]

260. Even better. I didn't know algae is better.

Combine a tiny diesel engine with electric drive motors and I'll bet we could break the 100 mpg barrier and all without a single drop of petroleum.

[porphyrian]

262. Then we could really piss them off by offering the technology free to the world.

Might have to duck a bullet or two, though.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. I think it should be legal and regulated. But then, cheetos probably should be

legal and regulated, too.

[porphyrian]

30. They are regulated - you can't buy them in a bag bigger than a pillow. - n/t

[Swamp Rat]

34. or like Funyuns

:9

[porphyrian]

36. OK, Funyuns are badass. Good point. - n/t

[SeattleGirl]

37. Legalize but regulate.

I don't give a flying fig if someone smokes pot, as long as they aren't driving or piloting a plane, or operating dangerous equipment. And, as long as it is banned from the same public places that cigarettes are banned. No, the smoke is not toxic like tobacco smoke, but the smell is something that I find extremely distasteful.

[porphyrian]

41. It's funny that you have a problem with the smell.

I mean, not really, I don't particularly like hearing country music. That's just preference. As for operating heavy machinery, though, you may be interested to know that a study in Great Britain was done to measure the effects on driving of marijuana and alcohol. One group each smoke a joint, the other each had a single glass of wine, while the control group stayed sober. The group that drank just one glass of wine each showed a remarkably lowered response time than the control group. The ones who smoked pot drove as well, and in some cases better, than the control. I'm not saying everyone should get high and drive around. Most high people require the munchies or having to go to the bathroom to get off the couch, and that's probably for the best. It's just that you shouldn't trust the statistics from U.S. law enforcement because guilt is always given to person who is intoxicated, whether the accident was caused by the other driver or not. Again, I'm not promoting bong hits while driving.

[Zhade]

182. "Most high people require the munchies...to get off the couch..."

The interesting thing about that "couch-lock" stereotype is this: the reason it abounds and is, to some extent, true is that there are two types of marijuana, one of which is much easier to grow and distribute under our current laws.

Sativa, which affects the mind, is a soaring, energetic, creative high. One does not get lazy using it. Quite the contrary; it's not a tweak by any means, but it does not slow you down either.

Indica, which is widely used for pain and other medicinal uses, affects the body, and does slow you down somewhat.

The reason the stereotype plagues those of us who aren't losers, who hold full-time jobs and thrive in them, who pursue all manner of creative pursuits and live rich, full lives is because indica is much cheaper to grow, as its growth pattern is more suited to indoor guerrilla operations.

As a result, sativa plants are a bit rarer than indica ones, indicas are more widely available and thus correlated with the slacker-stoner stereotype that fools so many people, even good liberal-minded folks, into thinking marijuana has no benefit and impacts people negatively.

That there are literally uncountable cross-strains of the two should show that most stoners AREN'T losers who never get anywhere in life. Hell, Carl Sagan wasn't a loser!

Neither was George Washington (though I take issue with some of his actions, his home garden isn't one of them).

[Mythsaje]

192. It's even more stripped down than that.

Sativa has a longer grow cycle, and takes longer to produce buds. Indica grows faster, buds faster, and produces thicker flowers. You're talking about a four to five week difference in crop turnaround.

The sativa strains such as Thai have been increasingly rare in the past couple of decades because they're just not money-makers. Too much effort for not enough result.

On the other hand, most people who do smoke seem to be able to live normal lives and aren't glued to a couch somewhere. This happens to such a minority of people it's probably equivilant to those who become medically addicted to alcohol to the point they can't function either.

Now, reaching back some twenty-five years in my memory, I understand that THC degenerates over time into other chemicals--namely CBCs and CBNs, which, rather than being mild stimulating hallucinigens, are actually mild depressants. Thus, it's not the strain that's so much the issue, as the freshness of the buds themselves. And each sub-strain tends to have its own mixture of chemicals, producing slightly different experiences based upon the body chemistry of the user.

Like I said, this is some very old info I'm dredging out of my memory from the Marijuana Grower's Guide and Marijauna Botany read some twenty five years ago.

Egads, has it been THAT long? LOL

[porphyrian]

196. ...and thanks for the further insight. - n/t

[porphyrian]

193. Good points. Sorry to perpetuate stereotypes. - n/t

[Zhade]

208. Oh, no worries. Even I've made jokes about being lazy on it.

I blame the prevalence of the stereotype, not the good person who happens to unwittingly reinforce it.

Great thread, btw!

[porphyrian]

213. It's been a while since we've had a real discussion of the subject...

...and I was wondering just the other day why in the hell it's still illegal. Thought I'd bounce the idea of the heads here.

[Hippo_Tron]

203. Personally when I've gotten high I feel like I'm not at all fit to drive

It's not reflexes so much that I'd be concerned about, but a lack of focus on the road and the possiblity of even falling asleep at the wheel. Also, marijuana does impair your judgement.

[porphyrian]

207. Television impairs your judgement.

It teaches you to pick the most interesting of fifty pieces of shit and like it, even though more than half the time you're watching it's simply a commercial.

While I've known smokers who do basically just go to sleep when they get high, I assure you that is not the reaction most people have, at least not in my experience. Especially when you drag them into the public. I think your fears may be exaggerated, if not unfounded.

[Zhade]

211. Maybe your judgment.

I've done everything that I can do sober, while stoned (with the exception of driving immediately after smoking), and strangely enough, my judgment was fine.

I've never acted differently than I would if I hadn't smoked, except perhaps more openly and honestly with others, in a conscious way completely unlike being drunk.

My best creative work usually comes out after smoking.

Musically, I'm much more into the flow and much more aware of all the aspects of voice control and guitar fretwork while stoned out of my gourd.

No; my personal experience is decidedly different than yours, it seems.

(And a note to porphyrian on tv: the combo of the two and my own instinct for picking apart a story has made my writing much better over these last five years. I don't think television has nothing to offer; it just has not that much.)

[porphyrian]

212. Ha! There are, as always, exceptions.

Maybe it's a little more like trying to find a lost ring in a dumpster.

[SeattleGirl]

226. Well, I know if I were to smoke pot again, getting behind the wheel

of a car or piece of heavy equipment would NOT be good. My perception of how fast or slow I was going was totally thrown off, and I think it's true for others, though certainly not all people. People react differently to different things.

[porphyrian]

227. Again, I wasn't suggesting people should smoke up and hit the road...

...just that it may not be the issue some try to make it. Certainly, compared to drunk driving (and drinking is legal), it's a lesser concern.

[H2O Man]

39. Listen to

Peter Tosh.

[porphyrian]

42. An entire people can't be wrong. - n/t

[shanti]

215. the bush doctor

"legalize it, i'll advertise it". heh.

[madokie]

40. I'll have a toke to that.

[porphyrian]

43. If all goes well, I'm not far behind you. - n/t

[William Bloode]

49. Free the weed, and stop making criminals out of otherwise good folks like myself!

[porphyrian]

52. Those are pretty. - n/t

[William Bloode]

56. Why thank ya.

The smell is outta this world to, pineapple and blueberry mmmmmmmmmmm!

[porphyrian]

58. Are those bright orange hairs? It's hard to tell in the light. - n/t

[William Bloode]

59. On that particular one, no.

They do change into bright orange, but that plant is only about half done so the hairs are still white. And yeah the Hps(high pressure sodium)lamp does emit much more orange/red spectrum giving that yellow/orange glow.

[porphyrian]

60. Got it. Let me know how them flowers turn out. - n/t

[KG]

50. decriminalize. also, deriminalize industral hemp.

wanna revolutionize agriculture in america? let farmers grow hemp.

[porphyrian]

53. I'm all for it. Fuck Dow Jones. - n/t

[shanti]

216. thank you!

the attack against HEMP is the most insidious part of the whole thing. isn't wr hearst the one who started that?

[porphyrian]

51. Not a single vote for keeping it illegal as-is? - n/t

[WindRavenX]

55. they'll come out soon enough

I love the Nanny State DUers :eyes:

[porphyrian]

61. There's one, if it isn't just a smartass. - n/t

[originalpckelly]

62. Make it legal everywhere except 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue...

because we all know he's been smoking it.

[porphyrian]

63. I think he's more of a pharmaceutical man right now.

That's not to say that he hasn't smoked up before.

[porphyrian]

67. Shameless kick for the after-lunch crowd. - n/t

[Mr_Spock]

73. Legal, but regulated like alcohol

:hippie:

[WindRavenX]

74. Agreed--except the drinking age should be 18

If I'm an adult, I should be able to make ALL choices to what I decide to drink/smoke :hi:

[porphyrian]

77. Once I passed 21, I stopped paying attention to age-related issues for the most part.

However, I think that you should be able to do whatever you want to yourself once you're legally an adult, so we're in agreement.

[WindRavenX]

80. absolutely

I'm willing to concede the age of being a legal adult to 19 or 20, as they do in Japan. Keeps drugs/ciggies/pot out of High School, if we're really that concerned about it.

Personally, the culture of how we see and interact with substances need to change. Why am I allowed to drink myself to death and be a threat to others, all legally, while I'm a goddamn criminal every night I smoke a bowl? :shrug:

[porphyrian]

83. That bothers me, too. Especially with mandatory minimums and all. - n/t

[WindRavenX]

86. possession in MA, where I am going to college, is a FELONY

That is fucking borderline "cruel and unusual".

People need to get educated on what the good bud is all about...because it certainly isn't a goddamn felon :grr:

[porphyrian]

87. Yeah, Florida isn't much better. Good people are going to prison.

That's the real crime.

[shanti]

218. that's insane!

:(

[Mr_Spock]

79. Yup, I was grandfathered into 18 years old which was good

I felt bad for the 18 year olds - old enough to leave home for college, but not old enough to drink - huh?

[WindRavenX]

81. IMO and experience, having the drinking age be 21 does nothing but...

...encourage binge drinking and other unsafe drinking behavior. I think there have been studies that have confirmed this as well.

[porphyrian]

76. That seems to be the majority opinion, and I could certainly live with that. - n/t

[Chovexani]

75. Legalize, tax and regulate it. (n/t)

[porphyrian]

78. What about homegrown?

I think others here have made a good argument by comparing it to alcohol (you can make your own beer, which doesn't get taxed or otherwise regulated unless you're reported). You think that's good? I do, I'm just clarifying.

[Jed Dilligan]

82. More than that

It should be ILLEGAL to prosecute people for simple possession of psychoactive substances. Make sure this Drug War never comes back!

[porphyrian]

85. While I'm sure this isn't a priority issue for our new Congress...

...wouldn't it be nice to talk about the "drug war" in the past tense?

[autorock]

88. Anyone who thinks it shouldn't be legal

is an idiot. Marijuana kills a total of zero people per year, while alcohol-related deaths number over 100,000 per year in America alone.

Alcohol has no positive mental or physical effects, while it has been proven that marijuana lessens the side effects of chemotherapy. Let's not forget that brain cells regenerate faster after marijuana smoking than after alcohol drinking.

Unfortunately idiot reich wingers refuse to listen to the facts and prefer to stick with their hysterical "OMG pot is EVIL!!!1" ravings.

[bling bling]

93. I'm not sure about all that.

Just so we're dealing with credible information, do the brain cells regenerate after marijuana smoking? Are the brain cells even damaged or killed after marijuana smoking? I'm not sure. But I did find this:


Marijuana might cause new cell growth in the brain

A synthetic chemical similar to the active ingredient in marijuana makes new cells grow in rat brains. What is more, in rats this cell growth appears to be linked with reducing anxiety and depression. The results suggest that marijuana, or its derivatives, could actually be good for the brain.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8155




Also, I do believe there can be some benefits from drinking:

Health benefits of moderate drinking

Psychological - stress reduction
Cardiovascular - reduction in risk of coronary artery disease
Increased appetite - especially in the elderly

http://www.med.unc.edu/alcohol/education/benefits.html

[Marrak]

89. Legalize it! Yeah!!

Legalize it, tax it, sell licenses/stamps to grow-your-own, with limits etc. Only adults 21 & up. Clear out the prisons of people in for Pot! Mucho savings for all.

[jpwhite]

92. do not legalize pot

Marijuana joints have over 300 times the cancer causing agents of one cigarette. In other words it takes over 300 cigarettes to equal the negative effects of one marijuana joint. That's not good. This should not be legalized.

James
[e-mail]

[bling bling]

95. Do you have a link to go with that assertion?

Marijuana Unlikely to Cause Head, Neck, or Lung Cancer

According to Ford, he thought he would find an association between marijuana use and cancer, but "that the association would fall away when we corrected for tobacco use. That was not the case. The association was never there." And that surprised him because of the way marijuana is smoked: deep inhalations, with the smoke held in for effect. "It seemed natural that there would be some connection," he tells WebMD.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309

[BlackVelvet04]

96. Nobody is saying YOU have to smoke it......

so what's it to you?

[porphyrian]

98. I've heard studies that show the opposite is true.

Studies, like polls, inevitably say what the person paying for them wants. While I appreciate your looking out for me and others, I think you'd do better in removing cancer-causing agents from the environment by stopping corporate polluters, who can do in one week what all pot smokers do to themselves in a year.

[Zhade]

183. That's an absolute lie. Stop lying.

Your bullshit won't fly here, since we know it's bullshit.

(Unless you're so ignorant of the facts that you really believe this, in which case, instead of "stop being a fucking liar spewing lies", I'll say "get thee to Google and educate yourself".)

[MrSlayer]

252. Complete and utter bullshit.

Marijuana has been found to not cause cancer at all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner07022005.html

http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20050710150925597

Google it before putting out these ridiculous claims.

[BlackVelvet04]

94. Unbelievable.....

regulate it? Sure, we need the nanny state regulating more stuff.

[porphyrian]

99. Do you think elementary school children should drink booze?

Regulation itself isn't a bad thing, you know. People can't be trusted to play nice. That doesn't mean every aspect of our lives should be micromanaged, either. Does that make sense, or are you still feeling it should be totally unregulated?

[BlackVelvet04]

112. It's already illegal to get minor children high on anything.

Marijuana is a plant that can be used in it's natural form. It doesn't need to be regulated.

[Catchawave]

97. Virginia has ABC stores

for alcohol. Why not sell cigs, guns and recreational drugs this way too?

Eliminates a lot of criminals that way :D

[porphyrian]

100. That way it could be taxed and people could be carded.

And, like with beer and wine, you could still make your own at home, although that would avoid taxation and could fall into the hands of minors.

[GirlinContempt]

101. Well, really...

it could just as easily fall into the hands of minors if you bought a case of beer and brought it home.

[porphyrian]

104. I know, I'm just playing different angles to see what people really think.

As soon as you tell kids they can't go in the cookie jar, they make it their mission to figure out how to do it anyway.

[GirlinContempt]

105. haha yeah

I was just sayin' :)

[ruggerson]

102. I went to vote in this poll, but couldn't remember what it was about

:smoke:

[porphyrian]

106. That's understandable. - n/t

[AJ9000]

134. Yeah... like, check it out - if it wasn't illegal - then it wouldn't be illegal cuz

makin it illegal is - like so uncool.. so check it out

[jen4clark]

103. Legal WITH Cheetos!

Ummmmm, cheetos!

[porphyrian]

108. That would be a fucking awesome marketing campaign.

Hear that, Frito-Lay?

[timtom]

107. Regulate-schmegulate!

Let's regulate the sunshine, the stars at night, and water. Let's let some cynical body make a buck off everything!

Marijuana should be free of all ham-fisted constraints. It occurs in nature. Let's use it.

That goes for mushrooms, too.

(BTW, I haven't used since 1985 -- but I believe I would...)

[porphyrian]

110. Another no-regulation vote. Alright.

By the way kids, be extremely careful with the mushrooms. Each hallucinogenic variety has a poisonous doppleganger, and you don't want to end up in a coma or dead just because you wanted to trip. Leave harvesting to the pros, and make sure you trust your dealer. This has been a drug abuse public service announcement.

[Fuzz]

109. It should be mandatory for some.

Get people to lighten the fuck up a bit. ;)

[porphyrian]

111. I had an idea once of having bong police...

"Excuse me, sir. You are in violation of buzzkill law. I'm going to have to ask you to hit this bong."

It was really funny at the time.

[GoneOffShore]

114. Iet's legalize pot and make Cheetos illegal.

[porphyrian]

115. Oh sure, let's start a black market for Cheetos...

Imagine what it would do to hip hop lyrics.

Edit: brainfart

[GliderGuider]

116. I'm in the "legalize-it-all" camp.

People like to get high. We've done it for hundreds of thousands of years. It's time to accept reality and adopt a cost/benefit approach to harm reduction. Some people will always find a way to mess themselves up. The cheapest, not to mention most intellectually and ethically honest, thing to do is to accept that fact. Putting people in jail for following what appears to be a genetic-level urge is insane.

Educate people, regulate the sale of the harder stuff like meth and H, and provide good treatment for people who screw up anyway. Pot? Fugddaboudit. It's a harmless freaking weed.

[porphyrian]

117. Every culture, every era. I don't disagree with you. - n/t

[Orsino]

120. As legal as alcohol.

Restricted to adults, and count it as "under the influence" for transit operators, etc.

[porphyrian]

122. I think that's how most people seem to feel about it.

Check out the post below about operating "under the influence," though.

[porphyrian]

121. OK, I didn't find the study, but I found a blog from down under...

This is in regards to driving on pot (vs. alcohol).

http://www.resist.com.au/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=41

"To date, the result of this research is very consistent:
Marijuana has a measurable yet relatively mild effect on psychomotor skills, yet it does not appear to play a significant role in vehicle crashes, particularly when compared to alcohol."

Good reading.

[Mythsaje]

194. That's where they conducted ONE of the driving studies...

The other one was done in Jamaica, of all places.

Both had similar results according to the information I read.

[williesgirl]

123. Legalize it and take the profits from the dealers and give to localities.

[porphyrian]

125. Many small town economies already rely on pot.

Why not make it legitimate? Maybe the weed tax could fund public education - that would be ironic, huh?

[Swamp Rat]

124. BAN cottonmouth!

:smoke: ... :beer:

[porphyrian]

128. I could support that campaign.

I just remembered a time I was grocery shopping with cotton mouth (the only connection) and I picked up that orange-banana-strawberry juice by whoever makes it. Anyway, something about that combination reminded me of bubblegum. I'm not sure why. It killed the cotton mouth, though.

[Zhade]

185. But not the Kottonmouth Kings! They're actually quite progressive.

"Peace of Mind" is a very nice track about the corruption of this government and, basically, mankind at this point.

KMK - great rappers, great dedication to a worthy goal.

[Raffi Ella]

126. Yes.

Alcohol is legal.I see no difference between the two.None at all.If people can buy alcohol they should be able to buy marijuana.Period.

[porphyrian]

129. Well, one difference is that it's hard to smoke vodka.

;)

[Nevernose]

127. Nevada vs. DU: 45% legalize, 55% keep criminal

Although a majority voted to legalize medical marijuana.

[porphyrian]

130. Actually, that's pretty good for Nevada.

That state has a long tradition of anti-marijuana law. I guess they're trying to compensate for their acceptance of prostitution. Give it a few more years.

[gulliver]

131. Legalize all drugs. It's just the lesser of two evils.

Tax the drugs to pay for reducing the harm of legalized drugs and for offsetting the burden of the relatively few "drug casualties" on society. It would be trading a colossal evil down to merely a large one.

The drug laws plainly don't work. They create criminal factories (black-markets, prisons), ruin lives, and don't keep drugs out of the hands of anyone who wants them. The drug laws divide society politically and create a health communication "dead zone" where the facts about drug use can't be discussed without an aura of propaganda and threat. The only thing that keeps drug laws in place is fanatacism and fear. They didn't exist until the early 1900s. They are more of a failure than Prohibition.

[porphyrian]

142. No one's even mentioned the damage the "drug war" has done to other countries yet.

Look what it's done to countries like Colombia. I agree with you.

[BlooInBloo]

135. Please legalize it. So I don't have to see this poll over and over and over.

[porphyrian]

143. You don't want to see this poll over and over? - n/t

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

137. I think the fiscal estimates right now

for a full legalization of all drugs is at a annual savings of 37Billion, we could buy some more time in Iraq with that instead. War on drugs, poverty, and terrorism... ugh, we have nothing to show for any of them.

[porphyrian]

144. Well, we have a lot ruined and ended lives.

The prison industrial complex certainly profits from it.

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

151. Well I suppose that's better than nothing

:sarcasm:

[porphyrian]

155. Really. - n/t

[shanti]

220. and still does

check out the rise in the prison unions, especially california. you know what gets me? the fact that during the clinton admin., ganja convictions actually went up!? i could not believe that!

[porphyrian]

237. We cannot allow a system that profits from imprisoning citizens.

Mandatory minimums, the use of prisoner as slave labor, not just for public works projects, but by fucking corporate businesses?! Are we the only ones who see what the fuck is going on here?

[Greyhound]

152. Which ironically is almost enough to provide food, shelter, clean water

health and reproductive care, and basic education for the world.

This is what kills me about amerikans that claim to be liberal, we spend more money on our pets every year, than would be required to accomplish all this, which also would make it much easier to reduce our military budget by @ least a third. It is so do-able, all that is laking is the will.

[porphyrian]

160. That's an extremely good point, and it deserves it's own thread. - n/t

[Greyhound]

161. Thank you, I bring it up every few months so I can watch it sink like

a lead pellet through an out-gassing.

The number of Democrats that are really concerned with the solutions to our problems is pretty limited, judging by the responses to the issue and the lack of action by our politicians. Remember that the dismantling of our social "safety nets" and dissolution of the educational system was carried out under Democratic controlled legislatures.

[porphyrian]

162. Perhaps one good thing about the republican domination of our government...

...and their attempt to impoverish the middle class is that people who were once able to ignore the pitiful state of our poor and means of dealing with them were forced to acknowledge them. It takes a very strong person to be truly compassionate, and, sadly, most people are not up to the task, even within the party claiming to be for the people.

[Greyhound]

166. Good point.

They've glimpsed the ugly truth of the world as the re:puke:s envision it, and suddenly some of them realize how precarious their own positions are.
Here's to fighting the good fight.:toast:

[porphyrian]

170. Someone's got to.

:toast:

[0rganism]

184. don't forget to add in the tax revenue

Right now, all the illicit drug transactions take place in an underground economy, basically immune from taxation: no sales taxes, no income taxes, no import duties, nothing.

Try to imagine the kind of revenue generated by a sensible tax schedule applied to these transactions. The federal budget goes into the red damn near every year, the ratio of students to teachers in public schools is beyond ridiculous, close to 50 million people lack health coverage, all so we can call certain plants and chemicals illegal. It's like willfully starving yourself right next to a full pantry -- just turn the knob, open the door, and the whole picture changes.

[951-Riverside]

138. Legalize it like cheetos or BEER n/t

[porphyrian]

145. You need a closing bracket on the "[/font" in your sig line.

;)

[951-Riverside]

153. Thanks I haven't paid attention to my own sig in months

:P

[porphyrian]

156. No problem.

;)

[GreenTea]

139. Of course it should be LEGALIZED.

[porphyrian]

146. It seems like most people feel that way. - n/t

[CrownPrinceBandar]

150. Pot use has become so mundane in our society.......

that I find it hard that anyone, that doesn't have ties to big pharma or the timber/paper industry, can keep up this prohibition charade. I see marijuana mentioned on TV (albeit cable TV) almost on a nightly basis. Politicians like Barack Obama has come out and shamelessly admitted to pot use. Howard Fineman of MSNBC and Newsweek, on Tweety's show a few Sundays ago, said it was part of our society now.

Prohibition is a useless gesture and wasteful of Federal and State monies. We have a golden opportunity to push the legality issue right now. Convince our leaders that a great war on a wee plant is not viable anymore and is only making the problem worse.

[porphyrian]

154. Yet the prohibition continues into the 21st century...

Maybe Dethklok will make legalization metal!

[CrownPrinceBandar]

190. They do have a member named Toki.......

coincidence? I think not.

Keep it metal.

[porphyrian]

158. Kick to make sure the horse is dead. - n/t

[Marnieworld]

163. Absolutely.

Sell it with drive-thrus. Some beer stores do why not herb? I am so tired of having my buzz of choice discriminated against. The gov't should grow and tax it, regulate it whatever. It's only fair dammit!

[porphyrian]

164. I think those are called "tea barns" or something like that.

There's one here right across the street from FSU campus. I'm with you.

[Marnieworld]

167. Hey! I'm an alum from FSU!

Go 'noles! I probably went to that "barn" in fact. I certainly would have appreciated the other type of store I dreamed of at FSU then. Small world. :hi:

[porphyrian]

169. Remember Mike's Beer Barn?

It's on the French Town side of Tennessee Street, near the Wendy's.

[Marnieworld]

171. Ah memories. Good times.

Is it right across the street from the Fine Arts building? I remember going to one there a bunch of times as a theater major stuck working on shows. It was a while ago. Is Late Night Library still there?

[porphyrian]

172. You got it.

As for Late Night, I haven't been to that part of Gaines in over a year, so I'm not sure, but I think it is.

[Marnieworld]

174. amazing

I haven't been there in 13 years. OMG. You'll be amazed at how quickly time flies. <sigh> My first year there they won the National Championship. I transferred from an Arts school and had no idea they even had a decent football team. Say hi to my old campus for me. And raise a beer or two as well. Until we get the "right" kind of drive-thru of course!

:smoke:

[porphyrian]

175. Definitely. Hopefully it will be sooner than later. - n/t

[Zhade]

186. Ha, former 'Nole here too! Class of '97.

I wonder if Burt Reynold's jersey is still on the wall in Bill's Bookstore?

[porphyrian]

197. I haven't been in Bill's in years, but I can't imagine them taking it down. - n/t

[Nye Bevan]

165. 93% say legal!

:thumbsup: :smoke:

[porphyrian]

168. It's hardly scientific, but it does make you wonder...

How long are we going to let this issue be beaten down by militant prohibitionists?

[johnnie]

173. I say it should be

I don't smoke it, but it doesn't mean I don't think it should be illegal.

But isn't it really bad for your health? And will the anti-smoker nannies go after pot smokers too? Or are anti-smokers only sick of tobacco and not pot?

[porphyrian]

177. The Surgeon General has proven that life is fatal.

I'm sure it isn't good for your health to inhale any smoke. However, given the relative toxicity of our world, it's really a joke to single out pot smoke before the million or so more-damaging substances. Of course the nannies will go after pot smokers, but they don't have the right to infringe on my liberties unless I'm blowing it in their face.

[Zhade]

187. No. It is not really bad for your health.

I don't have time to call up the studies - I'm at work - so if you don't want to believe me, that's fine, but:

Medical studies have shown it shrinks tumors.

Its smoke is a bronchial dilator, as opposed to cigarette smoke, which is a bronchial constrictor.

There are no documented cases of marijuana-caused cancer.

There are no documented cases of marijuana overdoses.

That's just off the top of my head.

[johnnie]

195. I have no problem believing you

I know a bit about it and I wasn't saying that I am against smoking pot. But i will assure you that if pot becomes legal, the nannies will still make sure you don't enjoy it.

But to be fair, there are hazards in smoking pot. It may not be a leading cause of cancer, but there is no way that inhaling smoke, keeping it in your lungs for a while and repeating that over and over will ever be good for you.

It also might be too early to tell if pot causes cancer to people who use a lot of it. I don't think I would be irresponsible and claim it does not cause cancer. Studies are fairly new in the marijuana aspect of cancer and it may be too soon to tell.

[Zhade]

206. Your second paragraph isn't accurate.

Marijuana is, as I already noted, a bronchial dilator. It used to be prescribed to asthmatics, before it was criminalized for racist, power-hungry reasons (check out Anslinger's testimony about blacks - not his word, his was worse - desire to rape white girls after smoking for some eye-openers).

As far as the cancer aspect - how much time do you need? It's been decades since the first studies began, and in the prevailing years there is no conclusive evidence, if any at all, that marijuana use causes cancer.

None.

Again, don't believe me - I'd actually prefer that you check out www.mpp.org or www.norml.org and learn it all for yourself. This is a beneficial plant with medicinal and other positive uses that humanity has used for hundreds of thousands of years.

And if it were true, what the poster asserted above about joints being 300x worse than cigarettes (patently false, btw), I'd have cancer a thousand times over, as would the people in studies who have smoked for decades and never suffered a bit from their usage.

I'm very passionate about this because I like accuracy and truth, and this herb saved my sight, literally. Without it I'd be going blind right now.

Learn more at the sites I mentioned, they're fantastic, honest resources. :)

[porphyrian]

210. Yeah, I'd be more tumors than human by now.

;)

[shanti]

222. it doesn't even need to be smoked

tea, gooballs, brownies....that's the beauty of it. herb was placed on earth by god, imo.

[porphyrian]

224. Vaporizers are supposed to be really good.

I've never tried one myself, but the science behind them seems sound. Apparently, the temperature at which the active ingredient, THC, is activated is below the actual burning point of pot. Vaporizers, in theory anyway, only heat the weed to that temperature, so you get more of the drug, because none of it burns off in flame, and almost none of the toxins involved in putting fire to it. Anyone know more about them?

[johnnie]

223. Well,lol..Norml?

I support their cause, but they will obviously report the information they like. Now here is from The American Cancer society:

"Smoking Marijuana May Increase Cancer Risk
Researchers Link Smoking Marijuana with Risk of Head and Neck Cancers
Article date: 2000/01/18
A study by researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, and Arizona Cancer Center has linked smoking marijuana with an increased risk of head and neck cancers.

Their study, published in the December 1999 issue of the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, is not the first to link marijuana to such cancers. Earlier research has shown marijuana cigarettes contain more tar and higher levels of certain cancer-causing chemicals than tobacco cigarettes. DNA mutations have been found in respiratory system cells of marijuana users and several case reports have found an unexpectedly high number of marijuana users among patients with cancers of the head and neck region, including the mouth, tongue, throat, and larynx."

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Smoking_Marijuana_May_Increase_Cancer_Risk.asp

Of course you will find both sides of the issue showing their research is correct. And this follows my paragraph you claim is inaccurate.

Marijuana has been a round for a long time, but the major usage has only been around since the 60s really and before that, no real research was done on it. All you have to do is watch "Reefer Madness" to see what their research was like.

It wasn't until the 60s that marijuana was looked at more seriously than it was before and to me, that is not a long time. I would have to see the correlation between people who developed cancer and smoked tobacco and who smoke marijuana. If the patient smoked both, chances are good that the tobacco was considered the cause because either the patient hid the fact they smoked pot, or tobacco is easier to go with.

I respect your opinion, but I believe that the result of heavy marijuana usage has yet to be conclusive enough to sway my opinion the other way.

As I have said, I am all for legalizing pot and I am a tobacco smoker. I just think that if it is made legal, the pot smokers will open themselves up to all the crap the smokers get. And I don't think that showing the smoke nannies links to Norml will help the cause..lol.

[Zhade]

228. You're wrong to accuse norml of dishonesty.

But hey, as long as you don't oppose marijuana, it really doesn't matter that your information is out of date and not terribly convincing.

[johnnie]

230. I didn't say they were dishonest

I said they will show the research that tips the scale their way.

[Zhade]

176. Wanted to go with #2, but had to go with 'other'.

I like some regulations, but if one of them is that it can't be grown at home, no.

This beneficial plant should be completely legal. It's helped so many people in so many ways; I myself am not blind because of it (at least, so my doctors say). It used to be legal, it should be again.

There should be similar restrictions as smoking, in that kids shouldn't have access, people shouldn't drive around smoking it, and no one should be unwillingly exposed to its smoke - although it has never been shown to cause lung (or any kind of) cancer (and actually has been found to *shrink* tumors), people should only take into their bodies what they choose to expose themselves to (I feel that way about industrial pollution, too).

But should it be legal? DUH? One has to be pretty ignorant to come up with an argument about it being "so deadly!" (:rofl:) that it should remain illegal.

[porphyrian]

178. Why do we let it remain illegal then?

I just don't get it. Is everyone one bong hit too many to get off the couch to vote or what? Why do the militant prohibitionists get to tell us what we can and cannot do?

[Zhade]

180. Not in my case; I voted Tuesday right after taking my medicine.

(I take it for glaucoma.)

We have to fight even a lot of liberals on this issue, unfortunately. But we're getting closer; Nevada came within six points of completely legalizing this month.

It'll happen at some point, probably out of necessity.

[porphyrian]

189. Cool. I just hope it's soon. - n/t

[Marie26]

198. Sure.

A sane society would legalize pot, & criminalize caffeine.

[porphyrian]

199. Thankfully we're not a sane society. I'd be lost without my caffeine monkey.

It'd be nice if pot was legal, though.

[Marie26]

200. Me too

I'm hopelessly addicted to Diet Coke. But I think that the real reason pot is illegal isn't cause it's dangerous, but because it's relaxing. We're more than willing to allow stimulants like caffeine & nicotine, cause we're a workaholic, overachieving society that needs a constant rush of adrenaline to get through the 12-hour workday. Caffeine keeps us hyped & ready to to work like good little rats. Pot makes us chill out, relax & watch some old sitcoms. That's not very conducive to a capitalistic economy.

[porphyrian]

201. That wouldn't explain alcohol.

Alcohol is at least as much of a staple in our society as caffeine and nicotine, as is sugar, which produces both effects one after the other.

[Marie26]

202. You've spotted the hole

in my little theory. IMO, there is a difference between the effects of alcohol & pot, though both are depressants. Sugar is a high, too. People who drink get rowdy, loud, aggressive. People who are stoned just get passive. The flip side to America's over-achievement society is our violence & aggressiveness. Aggressiveness is prized in this society (sports, business, etc.), & passivity is a sin. Alcohol fits into this society nicely, pot doesn't. I'm not saying it's the only reason pot is illegal, but I do think the potential economic effects is an underlining reason for the criminalization.

[porphyrian]

204. It's still an interesting theory from an angle no one's really hit yet.

You should check out the info up-thread about the different strains, indica and sativa. The perception that pot is depressant comes from the preponderance of indica, apparently, and the age of the weed when you smoke it. Of course, I knew this, but the generalization is easier to remember...
;)

[Zhade]

217. Marijuana is not a depressant.

Look into the differences in sativa and indica - www.erowid.org is one site that details honest drug information.

Also check out www.mpp.org and www.norml.org for great resources on this issue. MPP's campaign in NV to legalize completely came within 6 points of passing, which is remarkable given NV's anti-marijuana sentiment.

[Marie26]

219. Then what is it?

I thought all mind-altering drugs were either stimulants or depressants? Is it that marijuana doesn't have an effect on the nervous system? If that's true, why does it have an effect on mental state?

[porphyrian]

221. I've heard it called "mild hallucinogen" before, to jump in without much to contribute.

I'm sure Zhade will have a better answer.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

236. It's a cannabinoid receptor.

"I thought all mind-altering drugs were either stimulants or depressants?"

I'm afraid neurochemistry isn't that simple.

[porphyrian]

242. That sounds like a dinosaur. - n/t

[Swamp Rat]

243. I feel like Godzilla right now.

I tried to vote again! :D

[porphyrian]

244. Heh, heh, psych! (Or is it sike?) - n/t

[Swamp Rat]

245. çyque

:D

Dude, I just jammed for a couple of hours with the drummer from Def Leppard... actually, he jammed with our group. ;)

[porphyrian]

246. Not bad. I bet that was fun. - n/t

[porphyrian]

249. ...and don't try to vote again. - n/t

[Matariki]

205. yes legalize it - and regulate it like alcohol

it's absurd that it's illegal - and this is coming from someone who doesn't like the stuff personally.

Some hemp aficionado suggested to me that it's only illegal because hemp threatened William Randolph Hearst's paper business. Anyone know if there's truth to that?

[porphyrian]

209. I've heard that one, too.

I've also heard people say that Dow Jones and/or pharmaceutical companies are to blame, both because you can't put a patent on a plant like you can a synthetic.

[porphyrian]

225. Did the horse die yet? - n/t

[Swamp Rat]

229. DAMN!!! ... I tried to vote again...

I'm stoned.... :D

[porphyrian]

231. Uh oh, you're in trouble now...

http://www.uoregon.edu.nyud.net:8090/~jlund/mr.hand.jpg

[Swamp Rat]

238. Mr. Hand!

:D Righteous dude! :hi:

[porphyrian]

239. ...but bush had to be a coke guy... - n/t

;)

[endarkenment]

232. Of course. How stupid is it to fill jails for drug crimes?

When are we going to snap out of our long national nightmare of total butthead stupidity?

Can we get back to where we might have gone in the mid 70's?

[porphyrian]

234. Wouldn't it be nice to go that other way now? - n/t

[LeftishBrit]

233. Make it legal but regulate it

Ban sales to under-18s; ban smoking in public enclosed places; impose stiff penalties for impaired driving; and tax it like tobacco. Otherwise, it should be legal.

[porphyrian]

235. There are already stiff penalties for impaired driving.

The substance is irrelevant. Otherwise, I agree.

[porphyrian]

240. Final kick? - n/t

[porphyrian]

241. Bet this thread's looking good right about now, isn't it? - n/t

[and-justice-for-all]

247. If people smoked more pot and had more sex....

..There would be a HHHHEEEELLLLL of alot less War.

[porphyrian]

248. I could get behind that movement. - n/t

[MrSlayer]

250. Should be completely legal.

But I would settle for regulation the way cigarettes and alcohol are. There is no doubt that you shouldn't be punished as a criminal for it.

[porphyrian]

251. It's amazing we aren't better represented on this. - n/t

[porphyrian]

257. Less than 1 in 20 people who've responded to this think pot should remain illegal.

So why is it?

[Cooley Hurd]

263. Because of this douchebag:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Anslinger

Harry J. Anslinger (May 20, 1892 – November 14, 1975) is widely considered to be the first United States "drug czar". He held office as the Assistant Prohibition Commissioner in the Bureau of Prohibition, before being appointed as the first Commissioner of the Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) on August 12, 1930. He held office an unprecedented 32 years in his role (rivaled only by J. Edgar Hoover), holding office until 1962. He then held office two years as US Representative to the United Nations Narcotics Commission.

Currently, many firmly oppose Anslinger's legacy against marijuana, fueling decades of misinformation about the drug. Some contend that Harry J. Anslinger was really just a representative puppet for a thriving political belief. In other words, although it would appear that Anslinger was a conservative who truly believed marijuana to be a threat to the future of American civilization, his biographer maintained that he was an astute government bureaucrat who viewed the marijuana issue as a means for elevating himself to national prominence. The responsibilities once held by Harry J. Anslinger are now largely under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy.
</snip>

[porphyrian]

264. Definitely a douchbag. - n/t

[Cooley Hurd]

261. All I want is to walk out to the store and be able to buy it as easily...

...as I can buy a 6-pack of beer. Tax it? Fine. Sell it to minors? Don't be silly...

[porphyrian]

265. Maybe that day is coming. - n/t

[DemBones DemBones]

266. It should be regulated better than tobacco is, considering what we've

learned about the tobacco companies adding nicotine to cigarettes to make them more addictive. I wouldn't put it past people who care only for profit, which unfortunately seems to include most CEOs these days, to add nicotine to marijuana. Quality control is important for anything you're going to ingest or inhale.

[porphyrian]

267. Right, they'd be under the same controls as tobacco and alcohol are SUPPOSED to be.

Assuming they're obeying the law and not trading hookers to inspectors to overlook things.